- 18 -
respondent’s agent gave her work papers to petitioner on the day
of the meeting. The copy of the work papers in the record
includes an entry stating that petitioner had submitted a Form
5213, which neither party contends occurred on September 11,
1992. In the absence of the requisite written notice, the 60-day
requirement is inapplicable. Petitioner therefore had until
April 15, 1994, 3 years from the due date of his 1990 return, to
submit a Form 5213. Petitioner’s filing of Form 5213 on
December 1, 1992, was timely in that it preceded the April 15,
1994, deadline.3
The parties disagree as to whether petitioner engaged in his
fishing activity with an objective of making a profit within the
meaning of section 183. Section 183(a) provides the general rule
which disallows all deductions attributable to activities “not
engaged in for profit”. Section 183(b)(1), however, qualifies
the general rule by allowing those deductions otherwise allowable
regardless of profit objective, e.g., interest and State and
local taxes. Further, section 183(b)(2) allows those deductions
which would be allowable if the activity were engaged in for
profit, but only to the extent that gross income attributable to
3We note that petitioner has only recently contested the
validity of his Form 5213. At the time of filing the form, both
parties treated it as valid and suspended examination of
petitioner’s returns. Petitioner appears to be attempting to
whipsaw respondent by claiming the assessments were barred by the
statute of limitations after enjoying the postponement of
determination under sec. 183.
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007